Net Neutrality Is Really, Officially Dead on Monday

While net neutrality supporters have filed lawsuits to restore the old rules, with some states (e.g, California, New York) considering or pushing legislation to reinstate them within their borders, the FCC's decision to roll back net neutrality rules will unavoidably take effect Monday. Those who believe that all traffic on the internet should be treated equally are urged to push their state legislatures, who could pass their own measures.

The most significant change resulting from the proposal is the stripping away of the FCC's authority to regulate broadband and the shifting of that responsibility to the FCC. It also removes the ban that keeps a service provider from charging an internet service, like Netflix or YouTube, a fee for delivering its service faster to customers than competitors can. Net neutrality supporters argue that this especially hurts startups, which can't afford such fees.

From the period when net neutrality was supposedly in effect 2 when it officially ends on Monday, I can say with first-hand experience that I saw no evidence whatsoever that net neutrality in its current iteration ever prevented Fast Lanes.

In fact, I repeatedly had to deal with isps intentionally slowing down VPN connections and telling our users that they would have to upgrade to business class in order to not have that happen, whether it the AT&T, Comcast, or some of the other isps out there.

What I did find out is that under the current net neutrality rules, some of those same isps we're getting some nice Kickbacks and getting a share the cost of bandwidth with lesser isps even though the greater isps were soaking up more bandwidth and more traffic.

What that has led me to believe is that net neutrality is just something named conveniently in order to Garner public support but actually does not do what it is labeled for. However it does allow the lobbyists for those isps to whip the public into a frenzy because it named its Kickback program something that most people with common sense would agree to, thus allowing these isps to misrepresent what the current net neutrality regulations actually do.

They then can send their marketers and shills out into the media and mislead the public.

None of this is merely speculation.

This is my first hand experience.

"Net neutrality" can die a horrible death on Monday for all I care. Then ISPs will be on the hook for their own bandwidth.

When it comes to acts or laws they REALLY want you to accept, this is usually a good assertion to assume.

Luckily, there are few people left to die on Monday. As most were already killed off during the initial end of Net Neutrality. And the Paris Accord.

Click to expand...

What many don't realize is that the regulations that came with net neutrality should not have been enforced as regulations but instead should have gone through the proper channels to become law.

Having the FCC over reach and enact these regulations actually circumvented the proper use of government and legislation.

Now, with net neutrality dead, proper legislation can be brought up and enacted on a state level, the way our founding fathers intended.

It's no surprise that with government being restored to the status it was intended under the founding fathers and the Constitution of the United States, that those companies and foreign entities that greatly profited from the rampant abuse of our political system are going out of their way to try to sway the public and cry foul.

From the period when net neutrality was supposedly in effect 2 when it officially ends on Monday, I can say with first-hand experience that I saw no evidence whatsoever that net neutrality in its current iteration ever prevented Fast Lanes.

In fact, I repeatedly had to deal with isps intentionally slowing down VPN connections and telling our users that they would have to upgrade to business class in order to not have that happen, whether it the AT&T, Comcast, or some of the other isps out there.

What I did find out is that under the current net neutrality rules, some of those same isps we're getting some nice Kickbacks and getting a share the cost of bandwidth with lesser isps even though the greater isps were soaking up more bandwidth and more traffic.

What that has led me to believe is that net neutrality is just something named conveniently in order to Garner public support but actually does not do what it is labeled for. However it does allow the lobbyists for those isps to whip the public into a frenzy because it named its Kickback program something that most people with common sense would agree to, thus allowing these isps to misrepresent what the current net neutrality regulations actually do.

They then can send their marketers and shills out into the media and mislead the public.

None of this is merely speculation.

This is my first hand experience.

"Net neutrality" can die a horrible death on Monday for all I care. Then ISPs will be on the hook for their own bandwidth.

I can handle being wrong. Pretty sure that won't be a problem this time. The internet was doing just fine before these regs came into existence and it was just as confusing and impossible to understand then too. It'll die just as confused as it began, except many corrupt pockets will no longer be lined.

What many don't realize is that the regulations that came with net neutrality should not have been enforced as regulations but instead should have gone through the proper channels to become law.

Having the FCC over reach and enact these regulations actually circumvented the proper use of government and legislation.

Now, with net neutrality dead, proper legislation can be brought up and enacted on a state level, the way our founding fathers intended.

It's no surprise that with government being restored to the status it was intended under the founding fathers and the Constitution of the United States, that those companies and foreign entities that greatly profited from the rampant abuse of our political system are going out of their way to try to sway the public and cry foul.

Click to expand...

The FCC is literally the body that congress designated BY LAW to provide oversight wrt the communication markets. It is in fact congressional law in and of itself.

Net Neutrality needs to be implemented by law, not given as part of a whole slew of powers to the FCC. We don't need the FCC to have the ability to regulate content, which was the ultimate goal of pushing the FCC to reclassify the internet, rather than simply passing legislation.

Do you people understand? Tom Wheeler 'promised to forbear' the FCC's authority to regulate content. All it would take is a change of mind and bam, suddenly the government can ban content, no new laws needed.

The FCC is literally the body that congress designated BY LAW to provide oversight wrt the communication markets. It is in fact congressional law in and of itself.

Click to expand...

It was never meant to have the broad powers it had.

The things done need to be law. But they weren't law because to become law, much of the shennanigans pulled in the net neutrality rules would have been dragged into the sunlight and never would have made it to final passing.

Net Neutrality needs to be implemented by law, not given as part of a whole slew of powers to the FCC. We don't need the FCC to have the ability to regulate content, which was the ultimate goal of pushing the FCC to reclassify the internet, rather than simply passing legislation.

Do you people understand? Tom Wheeler 'promised to forbear' the FCC's authority to regulate content. All it would take is a change of mind and bam, suddenly the government can ban content, no new laws needed.

Click to expand...

Literally there is no change regarding that. It would take a rule change for them to do it before and will take a rule change to do it after. If that was your fear, the loss of Title II means nothing.

The things done need to be law. But they weren't law because to become law, much of the shennanigans pulled in the net neutrality rules would have been dragged into the sunlight and never would have made it to final passing.

Click to expand...

It was precisely meant to have the board powers it has. That was the whole point of literally every FCC related law. and the FCC IS LAW.

FYI businesses are unlikely to make any changes to their policies until all of the legal cases involved with this are resolved. At least that will give some time to try to fix this mess. Most telecommunication companies only give a damn about profits and they will do what ever that they can to get additional revenue streams. Why the fuck do you think that they spent so much on lobbyists to get NN killed? Because they need new revenue streams to make up for the cord cutters.

Since there seems to be some confusion about what the FCC is and does, might be a good idea for everyone who cares to go read this (and probably the rest of the site, if you don't want to be ignorant or uninformed about what they say about themselves). There's a link to all the regs too, if you feel like tormenting yourself....

It was precisely meant to have the board powers it has. That was the whole point of literally every FCC related law. and the FCC IS LAW.

And what shenanigans? the only shenanigans were in the repeal.

Click to expand...

The FCC is a regulatory body. Laws are passed by Congress. The Congress may wish to abdicate its responsibility and just drink martinis and never rock the boat by picking a side. Well, tough shit. We don't have an elected king and that's the foolhardy path we were on with Obama.

The FCC is a regulatory body. Laws are passed by Congress. The Congress may wish to abdicate its responsibility and just drink martinis and never rock the boat by picking a side. Well, tough shit. We don't have an elected king and that's the foolhardy path we were on with Obama.

Click to expand...

The FCC has existed for 80+ years. It isn't congress abdicating, it is congress delegating to a dedicated body of which they still have full oversight. Your argument is that we shouldn't have a DOJ, congress should just decide which cases to try and how to investigate them. Or we shouldn't have a DOD, congress should just pass the laws necessary and the branches should adhere to them. etc. etc. Delegation is a perfectly valid thing and something that the US has done for 200+ years.

The FCC is a LAWFUL regulatory body passed by multiple LAWS passed by CONGRESS and signed by the president. The authority delegated to it is delegated by LAW. If you have a problem with the laws of the US, you should take it up with your congress person.

Thankfully left WV for Cali just in time so wont hurt my service quality, it affects rural areas the most where there's no lobby to protect small business as effectively, so money bags of "speech" can more easily change hands.

With their own stricter NN laws, places like Cali and NY get a better grip on the digital market this way at the expense of other states, small startups would appreciate this kind of protection from incumbents here.

Laissez-faire Capitalism doesn't happen in the ISP industry. I'm generally a free market guy, but when competition is nonexistent I'm in favor of unforgiving regulation.

Click to expand...

A more traditional free market response would be to "break the trusts" and promote competition. Consider that Fascist governments allowed private ownership of business but made them comply with their socialist agenda through heavy regulation. That is exactly the nightmare we are escaping by ending NN.

A more traditional free market response would be to "break the trusts" and promote competition. Consider that Fascist governments allowed private ownership of business but made them comply with their socialist agenda through heavy regulation. That is exactly the nightmare we are escaping by ending NN.

Click to expand...

The problem is in this rare instance completely open competition would create other problems. See below image. I don't think we want all these different companies running wiring everywhere. It would cause reliability issues with different companies constantly scaling poles, be unsightly, causes delays during outages, causes logistics issues when say... transferring wires to new poles, and so on.

The only way I could see competition happening in the ISP space is if it was handled similar to gas or other utilities. You have one regulated provider maintaining infrastructure, and then sellers use the infrastructure to compete with each other and sell the commodity.

Where's that pic from lol? Only place I've ever been that stuff that looked like that was in Nepal (sparking and broken, hanging wires included). I think there it was easier to just put up new wire over replacing the old crap, including the broken stuff.

From the period when net neutrality was supposedly in effect 2 when it officially ends on Monday, I can say with first-hand experience that I saw no evidence whatsoever that net neutrality in its current iteration ever prevented Fast Lanes.

In fact, I repeatedly had to deal with isps intentionally slowing down VPN connections and telling our users that they would have to upgrade to business class in order to not have that happen, whether it the AT&T, Comcast, or some of the other isps out there.

What I did find out is that under the current net neutrality rules, some of those same isps we're getting some nice Kickbacks and getting a share the cost of bandwidth with lesser isps even though the greater isps were soaking up more bandwidth and more traffic.

What that has led me to believe is that net neutrality is just something named conveniently in order to Garner public support but actually does not do what it is labeled for. However it does allow the lobbyists for those isps to whip the public into a frenzy because it named its Kickback program something that most people with common sense would agree to, thus allowing these isps to misrepresent what the current net neutrality regulations actually do.

They then can send their marketers and shills out into the media and mislead the public.

None of this is merely speculation.

This is my first hand experience.

"Net neutrality" can die a horrible death on Monday for all I care. Then ISPs will be on the hook for their own bandwidth.

Click to expand...

Sorry but your first hand experience doesn't mean that's the reality. Sorry to burst your bubble. Net neutrality laws were how Comcast and AT&T ended up in court for doing the things you think never happened.

You know it's one thing to evaluate your own experience within the world yet quite another to actually believe that your own experience alone is what the world should be measured by.

The governors of five states—Vermont, Hawaii, Montana, New Jersey, and New York—have also issued executive orders to impose net neutrality rules on ISPs that provide Internet service to state government agencies...

Click to expand...

The California Senate last month approved stricter net neutrality rules, including a ban on paid data-cap exemptions, and there is pending net neutrality legislation in most states...

Click to expand...

In case you need a list of states where related high-tech jobs will be at when job hunting.

Sorry but your first hand experience doesn't mean that's the reality. Sorry to burst your bubble. Net neutrality laws were how Comcast and AT&T ended up in court for doing the things you think never happened.

You know it's one thing to evaluate your own experience within the world yet quite another to actually believe that your own experience alone is what the world should be measured by.